1^^ 


h 


'%\M 


Chambers 


^i 


Magazine  of 
Christian  Literature 


3S\60S, 


Jj^^ 


tihvaxy  of  t:he  Cheolojical  ^t^mmaxy 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


From  the  Library  of 
Prof.  Benjamin  Breckinridge  Warfield 

Bequeathed  by  him  to 
the  library  of 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary 

.fS.  C44 


THE 


■S^liiKi  hi^^'- 


MWariFleld  LiWar-^  r 

AGAZINE  OF  CHRISTIAN  LITERATURE. 


Vol.  2. 


AUGUST,    1890. 


No.  5. 


For  The  Magazine  of  Christian  Literature. 

THE   BOOK   OF  JONAH  :    IS   IT  FACT   OR  FICTION  ? 


BY    KEY.    TALBOT   W. 


CHAMBERS,     D.D.,    LL.D.,     OF    THE    COLLEGIATE    EEFORMED     DUTCH 
CHURCH,    ]S"EW   YORK    CITY. 


The  old  metlioci  of  explaining  the  story 
of  Jonah  by  a  comparison  with  heathen 
fables  is  now  out  of  date.  The  myth  that 
Perseus  rescued  Andromeda  by  slaying  the 
Bea  monster  to  whom  she  was  exposed,  and 
the  similar  tale  that  Hercules  delivered 
Hesione,  who  was  confronted  with  the  same 
danger,  by  leaping  into  the  jaws  of  the 
monster  and  tearing  out  its  entrails,  are  ad- 
mitted now  to  have  no  connection  with  a 
Hebrew  narrative  composed  long  before  the 
earliest  date  assigned  to  these  classical 
stories.  Indeed,  they  are  so  different  in 
tone  and  texture  and  ethical  purport  that 
only  a  wild  imagination  can  dream  that  all 
three  belong  to  the  same  category. 

But  at  the  present  time  the  question  has 
taken  a  new  shape.  It  is  no  longer  between 
believers  and  unbelievers,  or  supernatural- 
ists  and  rationalists,  or  the  learned  and  the 
ignorant.  But  devout  scholars  of  high  re- 
pute for  attainments  and  character,  who 
equally  recognize  the  divine  authority  of  the 
written  Word,  differ  very  widely  as  to  the 
way  in  which  the  Book  of  Jonah  is  to  be 
regarded.  Some  accept  the  common  opin- 
ion of  the  Church  at  large  that  it  is  strictly 
historical,  and  is  a  faithful  narrative  of  act- 
ual occurrences.  Others  affirm  that  it  is 
an  imaginative  composition,  not  intended 
to  be  understood  literally,  but  written  with 
a  didactic  purpose,  like  the  parables  of  our 
Lord,  or  the  vision  related  to  King  Ahab 
by  Micaiah,  the  son  of  Imlah  (1  Kings  xxii. 
19-23).  Professor  Briggs  ("  Biblical  Study," 
pp.  238-39)  does  not  positively  pronounce 
Jonah  to  be  a  fiction,  but  strenuously  in- 
sists that  if  it  were  there  would  be  no  loss, 
tipeaking  of  this  book  and  Esther  he  says, 
*'  The  model  of  patriotic  devotion,  the  les- 
son of  the  universality  of  divine  providence 
and  grace,  would  be  still  as  forcible,  and 
the  gain  would  be  at  least  equal  to  the  loss. 


if  they  were  to  be  regarded  as  inspired 
ideals  rather  than  inspired  statements  of 
the  real.  The  sign  of  the  Prophet  Jonah 
as  a  symbol  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ  is  as  forcible,  if  the  symbol  has  an 
ideal  basis,  as  if  it  had  an  historical  basis." 
To  the  same  effect  Professor  Bruce  says 
("The  Chief  End  of  Revelation,'' p.  221), 
*'  On  similar  grounds  we  can  regard  with 
equanimity  critical  discussions  respecting 
the  literary  character  of  such  a  book  as 
that  of  the  Prophet  Jonah.  Whether  it  be 
history,  or  whether  it  be  parable,  that  book 
bears  witness  to  the  catholicity  of  divine 
grace,  and  in  performing  that  important  ca- 
nonical function,  it  fully  vindicates  its  title 
to  a  place  in  the  literature  of  revelation." 
Still  more  plain  is  the  language  of  Professor 
G.  P.  Fisher,  of  Yale  University,  in  his  ad- 
mirable article  in  the  Century  for  January 
last,  on  the  nature  and  method  of  Revela- 
tion. After  mentioning  the  hatred  of  pious 
Israelites  toward  the  abominations  of  pagan- 
ism, which  awakened  a  desire  for  the  divine 
vengeance  to  fall  upon  heathen  worshippers, 
he  proceeds  (pp.  4G3-G4),  "  An  impressive 
rebvike  of  this  unmerciful  sentiment,  and 
what  is  really  a  distinct  advance  in  the  in- 
culcation of  an  opposite  feeling  is  found  in 
the  Book  of  Jonah.  There  are  reasons 
which  have  availed  to  satisfy  critics  as 
learned  and  impartial  as  Bleek,  who  are  in- 
fluenced by  no  prejudice  against  miracles  as 
such,  that  this  remarkable  book  was  origi- 
nally meant  to  be  an  apologue — an  imaginary 
story,  linked  to  the  name  of  an  historical 
person,  a  prophet  of  an  earlier  date,  and  was 
composed  in  order  to  inculcate  the  lesson 
with  which  the  narrative  concludes.  This 
was  the  opinion  also  of  the  late  Dr.  T.  D. 
Woolsey.  One  thing  brought  out  by  the 
experience  of  Jonah  is  that,  so  great  is 
God's  mercy  that  even  an  explicit  threat  of 


258 


MAGAZIXE  OF  CHRISTIAN  LITERATURE. 


[August, 


dire  calamities  may  be  kft  unfulfilled  in 
case  there  intervene  repentance  on  the  part 
of  those  against  whom  it  ■\vas  directed. 
The  prophet  who  was  exasperated  at  the 
sparing  of  the  Ninevitcs  was  taught  how 
narrow  and  cruel  liis  ideas  were,  by  the  sym- 
bol of  the  gourd  '  which  came  up  in  a  night 
and  perished  in  a  night.'  He  was  incensed 
on  account  of  the  Avithering  of  the  gourd 
which  had  shielded  his  head  from  the  sun. 
The  Lord  referred  to  Jonah's  having  had 
jiity  on  the  gourd,  and  said  :  '  And  should 
not  I  spare  Nineveh,  that  great  city,  Avherein 
are  more  than  sixscore  thousand  persons 
that  cannot  discern  between  their  right 
hand  and  their  left  hand  ;  and  also  much 
cattle  ": '  This  humane  utterance,  in  which 
compassion  is  expressed  even  for  the  dumb 
brutes,  is  memorable  for  being  one  of  the 
most  important  landmarks  in  Scripture, 
since  it  marks  a  widened  view  of  God's  love 
to  the  heathen.  To  illustrate  trhis  truth 
the  narrative  was  written,  and  toward  it  as 
onward  to  a  goal  it  steadily  moves.''  * 

The  same  ground  is  taken  by  Br.  Charles 
H.  IL  "Wriglit,  author  of  several  valuable 
cxegetical  works,  in  a  volume  of  "  Biblical 
Essays,"  issued  in  18SG.  His  view  is  that 
the  book  is  an  allegory,  which  he  supports 
by  a  reference  to  the  fourth  chapter  of  Gala- 
tians  in  which  the  Apostle  Paul  cites  the 
account  given  in  Genesis  of  Abraham's  two 
sons,  one  by  the  handmaid  and  one  by  the 
free- woman,  and  then  adds  "which  things 
contain  an  allegory."  But  the  allegory 
here  instead  of  excluding  presupposes  the 
historical  sense.  Dr.  Wright  holds  that 
the  book  is  an  allegorical  description  of 
Israel's  past  and  a  prophecy  of  Israel's  fu- 
ture, lie  explains  the  meaning  of  the 
great  fish  by  such  phrases  as  Isaiah's 
(xxvii.  1)  "  He  shall  slay  the  sea-monster 
which  is  in  the  sea,"  i.e.,  the  world-power 
opposed  to  God  and  His  people,  and  Jere- 
miah's (li.  34)  ''The  King  of  Babylon 
liath  devoured  me  ...  he  hath  swallowed 
me  up  like  the  sea-monster,  he  luith  filled 
his  maw  with  my  delicates,"  and  still  further 
the  Avords  of  Jehovah  (li.  44)  "  I  will  do 
judgment  upon  Bel  in  Babylon,  and  I  will 
bring  forth  out  of  his  mouth  that  which  he 

*  One's  confidence  in  Professor  Fisher'e  critical  acumen  is 
shaken  by  hia  remark  (p.  402)  on  the  supposed  fact  that  the 
less  instructed  Hebrews  imagined  that  there  waa  Bome  sort  of  a 
territorial  limit  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Ciod  whom  they  wor- 
shipped. "  An  indii<tinct  idea  of  this  kind  is  at  least  a  natural 
explanation  of  the  attempted  flit^hl  of  the  Prophet  Jonah  to 
Tarshish  which  lay  on  the  western  border  of  tlie  Mediterra- 
nean." We  believe  that  all  modern  critics  arc  agreed  that  the 
phrase  (i.  3)  "  lo  flc*  from  the  presence  of  tlie  Lord"  does  not 
mean  at  all  that  the  prophet  hoped  to  escape  Jehovah's  omnis- 
cient eye,  but  that  he  fled  from  beint;  in  the  presence  of  the 
Lord  as  His  servant  and  minister.  It  was  a  formal  renuncia- 
tion of  his  office  Weak  as  Jonah  was,  he  could  not  possibly 
have  ret;iirde<l  "  the  God  of  heaven,  which  hath  made  the  sea 
and  the  dry  land  "  (i.  9)  as  a  local  deity. 


hath  swallowed  up."  To  these  passages  is 
to  be  added  the  saying  of  Hosea  (vi.  2), 
"  After  two  days  will  He  revive  us  :  on  the 
third  day  He  will  raise  us  up,  and  we  shall 
live  before  Him."  On  the  basis  of  these 
hints  Dr.  AVright  thinks  that  the  story  was 
constructed  in  order  to  meet  the  case  of 
Israel  Avhen  restored  to  their  own  land. 
They  expected  that  the  judgments  upon  the 
heathen  Avorld  foretold  in  the  prophets 
Avould  bo  at  once  executed,  and  since  they 
were  not,  they  were  greatly  disappointed. 
It  was  not  enough  that  the  covenant  people 
were  brought  back,  their  enemies  and  God's 
needed  to  be  signally  overthrown,  and  since, 
on  the  contrary,  they  were  great  and  flourish- 
ing, Avhile  Israel  was  weak  and  in  subjec- 
tion, they  became  gloomy  and  depressed. 
Now  the  Avriter  of  the  Book  of  Jonah  made 
his  narrative  to  suit  the  case.  First  the 
huge  fish  swallows  the  jirophet  Avho  repre- 
sented his  people  ;  his  entombment  con- 
tinues three  days.  Then  he  is  suddenly  ex- 
tricated, alive  and  Avhole.  He  proceeds  on 
an  errand  of  mercy  to  the  great  heathen 
capital  of  which  the  fish  was  a  symbol,  and 
that  errand  is  successful.  Here,  then,  is 
exhibited  anew  and  in  a  very  striking  form 
the  extent  of  the  divine  compassion  and  the 
truth  that  God's  denunciations  of  wrath 
against  any  nation  are  conditioned  on  the 
continuance  in  evil  of  the  nation  especially 
threatened.  The  ruin  of  kingdoms  an- 
nounced by  any  prophet  might  be  averted 
by  their  repentance.  Jeremiah  expressly 
states  this  (xviii.  7,  8)  "  At  what  instant  I 
shall  speak  concerning  a  nation,  to  pluck  up 
and  to  destroy  it ;  if  that  nation,  concern- 
ing Avhich  I  have  spoken,  turn  from  their 
evil,  I  Avill  repent  of  the  evil  that  I  thought 
to  do  unto  them."  This  great  principle  is 
emphasized  in  Jonah  because  his  unwilling- 
ness to  execute  the  commission  with  which 
he  was  entrusted  was  due  to  the  conviction 
he  cherished  in  his  innermost  soul  that  God 
Avas  "  gracious  and  full  of  compassion,  slow 
to  anger,  and  plenteous  in  mercy"  (Jonah 
iv.  2).  He  considered  it  quite  possible  that 
God  might  repent  of  the  evil  He  designed 
to  do,  and  that  his  message  delivered  in 
Nineveh  might  be  the  very  means  of  awaken- 
ing the  repentance  Avhich  would  avert  the 
threatened  doom.  It  is  not  strange,  there- 
fore, that  this  result  when  it  did  occur  great- 
ly surprised  him.  His  prophecy  Avas  appar- 
ently a  failure,  and  the  heathen  enjoyed  a 
Avonderful  exhibition  of  the  divine  favor. 
This  Avas  admirably  adapted  to  correct  th*) 
vicAvs  of  the  exiles  who  returned  from  Baby- 
lon. For  though  restored  they  Avere  still 
under    the    Gentile  yoke.      Their  bodies 


1890.]       THE  BOOK  OF  JOJ^TAII:    IS  IT  FACT   OR   FICTION? 


259 


their  cattle,  and  their  goods  were  in  the 
power  of  their  enemies,  and  they  were  con- 
sequently in  great  distress  (Neli.  ix.  3G-37). 
It  was  quite  natural  for  them  to  scan  eagerly 
the  horizon  in  order  to  discover  any  one  who 
would  bring  them  news  of  the  great  overthrow 
which  they  had  been  taught  to  expect  and 
which  they  eagerly  wished.  The  allegory 
also  represents  one  of  their  expectations  and 
its  disappointment.  This  w^as  the  hope 
excited  by  Haggai's  promise  to  Zerubbabel 
that  followed  immediately  upon  the  predic- 
tion of  a  great  shaking  of  the  heavens  and 
the  earth.  ' '  In  that  day,  saitli  Jehovah  of 
hosts,  will  I  take  thee,  0  Zerubbabel,  my 
servant,  the  son  of  Shealtiel,  saith  Jehovah, 
and  will  make  thee  as  a  signet  ;  for  I 
have  chosen  thee"  (ii.  23).  The  Jews  ex- 
pected that  their  governor  would  soon  be 
manifested  not  as  a  mere  Persian  viceroy, 
but  as  the  Anointed  of  Jehovah  ;  that  the 
government  would  be  upon  His  shoulder  ; 
and  that  they  would  indeed  sit  down  under 
His  shadow  with  great  delight,  and  His  fruit 
be  sweet  to  their  taste  (Cant.  ii.  3).  But 
this  expectation  was  not  realized.  Zerub- 
babel, although  he  was  a  lineal  descendant 
of  David  and  a  man  of  many  excellences, 
soon  passed  away.  Whether  he  died  in  ex- 
ile or  in  the  city  of  his  fathers,  we  know 
not,  but  his  viceroyalty  was  short.  The 
gourd  or  palmchrist,  on  which  the  Jews  had 
fixed  their  hopes,  and  which  for  a  time 
shadowed  and  sheltered  them,  was  destroyed. 
It  perished,  as  it  were,  in  a  night.  The 
worm  did  the  work  of  destruction.  And 
after  that  the  house  of  David  sank  for  cen- 
turies into  utter  insignificance. 

Dr.  Wright  thinks  that  the  reference  of 
our  Lord  to  Jonah  can  be  fully  justified 
even  if  the  ground  be  taken  that  the  book 
was  an  allegory  or  symbolical  prophecy. 
For  Messiah  and  the  people  of  Israel  are  so 
closely  connected  together  that  the  prophe- 
cies which  relate  to  the  one  refer  more  or 
less  directly  to  the  other.  Messiah  and 
Israel  are  both  termed  "  the  servant  of 
Jehovah,"  the  one  in  the  higher,  the  other 
in  a  lower,  sense  of  the  phrase  (cf.  Isa. 
xlii.  1  and  19).  The  events  which  happened 
to  the  people  of  Israel  in  the  infancy  of  the 
nation  find  a  counterpart  in  the  history  of 
Israel's  king.  The  world-power  sought  to 
destroy  both  in  infancy  (Ex.  i.  15-22  ; 
Matt.  ii.  IG)  ;  they  were  both  driven  into 
Egypt  for  temporary  deliverance  from 
danger  (Gen.  xlv.  7-11  ;  Matt.  ii.  13-15)  ; 
and  after  a  season  were  called  forth  out  of 
that  land  (cf.  Hos.  xi.  1  with  Matt.  ii. 
15).  It  is  hence  inferred  that  a  prophetical 
allegory,  depicting  the  temporary  death  of 


the  nation  and  its  resurrection  anew  to  a 
national  existence,  might  therefore  very 
properly  be  referred  to  as  containing  a 
prophecy  of  the  death  and  resurrection  of 
Israel's  Lord  and  king. 

We  have  thus  endeavored  to  give  a  faith- 
ful outline  of  Dr.  Wright's  view,  using 
largely  his  own  words,  and  it  is  fair  to  pre- 
sume that  the  w^ork  of  so  learned  and  de- 
vout a  scholar  presents  that  side  of  the 
question  as  fully  and  strongly  as  any  of  its 
advocates  could  desire.*  But  before  con- 
sidering his  theory  it  may  be  well  to  look 
at  the  objections  he  makes  to  the  accept- 
ance of  the  book  as  actual  history.  One  is 
that  if  the  f  ramers  of  the  Canon  of  the  Old 
Testament  had  so  regarded  it,  they  would 
scarcely  have  inserted  it  in  its  present  posi- 
tion among  the  prophetical,  instead  of  with 
the  historical  books.  It  is  hard  to  see  the 
force  of  this  reason.  The  book  does  not 
have  the  usual  character  of  histories  Avhicli 
are  anonymous  (Judges,  Ruth,  Samuel, 
etc.),  but  after  the  regular  manner  of  proph- 
ecies begins  with  the  customary  identifica- 
tion of  the  author,  "  the  AVord  of  the  Lord 
came  unto  Jonah."  And  to  this  is  prefixed 
the  word  ''And"  [in  A.  V.,  Now\,  thus 
joining  it  on  to  the  other  prophetic  writings, 
in  the  midst  of  which  it  is  found.  It  re- 
cords the  experience  of  a  prophet  in  the 
discharge  of  his  official  duty,  and  as  such 
Avas  surely  entitled  to  the  place  it  occupies, 
whether  interpreted  literally  or  symboli- 
cally. So  far  as  we  can  judge  from  the 
usual  methods  of  those  who  compiled  the 
Canon  they  had  no  option  but  to  2)ut  it 
where  we  find  it. 

Again,  it  is  said  that  "if  the  incidents 
mentioned  in  the  book  were  historical,  it  is 
more  than  strange  that  no  allusion  is  made 
to  any  one  of  them  in  the  Books  of  the 
Kings  and  the  Chronicles."  The  argument 
e  silentio  is  always  a  precarious  one,  because 
we  know  not  all  the  circumstances  of  the 
case.  Dr.  Wright  says  that  no  prophet 
was  ever  despatched  on  a  grander  or  more 
important  mission  than  Jonah,  and  the  out- 
come, if  the  narrative  be  regarded  as  his- 
tory, was  a  wonderful  success.  When  com- 
pared with  the  result  of  Jonah's  preaching, 
Elijah's  controversy  with  Israel  on  Mount 
Carmel     sinks    i"    /     utter     insifirnificance. 


♦  I  have  not  quoted  Dr.  Wright's  reference  to  the  parable  of 
the  Prodigal  Son,  because  that  parable  does  not  treat  of  Jews 
compared  with  Gentiles  but  (as  Luke  xv.  1,  2  shows)  of 
Pharisees  compared  with  publicans  and  sinners,  and  because 
the  whole  narrative  of  the  eldest  son  is  mere  costume,  designed 
to  set  off  and  enhance  the  ground  of  the  father's  compassion, 
but  having  no  independent  signification  of  its  own,  and  hav- 
ing no  counterpart  in  actual  life  either  when  the  exquisite 
parable  was  delivered  or  at  any  period  since,  any  more  than 
there  are  now  or  ever  have  been  "  ninety  and  ume  just  persons 
who  need  no  repentance." 


2  GO 


MAGAZmE  OF  CnRISTIAN  LITERATURE, 


[August, 


"  Why,  then,  shouhl  the  latter  incident 
have  been  recorded  iu  tlie  Second  Book  cf 
Kings  (chap,  xviii.),  while  the  most  extraor- 
dinary fact  connected  with  a  prophet  is 
passecl  over  in  silence  ?"  This  question  is 
by  no  means  unanswerable.  Elijah's  deal- 
ing at  ;Mount  Carmcl  was  a  constituent 
part  of  the  miraculous  procedures  intended 
through  the  agency  of  him  aiul  his  succes- 
sor Elisha  to  "arrest  the  dreadful  apostasy 
introduced  by  Ahab.  That  apostasy  was 
not  simply,  like  previous  backslidings,  the 
worship  of  God  by  idols,  but  an  absolute 
dethronement  of  Jehovah  and  the  putting 
of  Biwl  in  his  place.  To  overcome  this 
great  evil  and  recover  the  nation  back  to  its 
ancient  faith  there  was  an  unusual  display 
of  supernatural  power,  and  it  was  success- 
ful. The  people  swung  back  to  their  former 
moorings,  and  Baal  worship  was  suppressed. 
These  proceedings  were  part  and  parcel  of 
the  national  history,  and  they  needed  to  be 
recorded  if  that  his'tory  was  to  be  complete. 
The  experience  of  Jonah,  on  the  contrary, 
was  an  episode,  bearing  no  relation  to  the 
ordinary  stream  of  events,  an  object-lesson 
on  some  principles  of  the  divine  nature  and 
government,  and  therefore  not  requiring  to 
be  noticed  by  the  historian  or  annalist. 
The  author  of  the  Book  of  Kings  (2  Kings 
xiv.  25)  recorded  Jonah's  prediction  of  the 
recovery  of  the  lost  provinces  of  Israel  be- 
cause it  indicated  the  divine  hand  in  the 
l^rosperous  reign  of  the  great  Jeroboam  II., 
and  he  omitted  to  mention  the  prophet's 
expedition  to  Nineveh  because  it  had  no 
bearing  upon  the  course  of  things  inside 
the  commonwealth  of  Israel. 

Precisely  the  same  objection  may  be  made 
to  the  Book  of  Ruth.  Iler  name  and  his- 
tory are  not  mentioned  or  even  alluded  to 
in  the  Old  Testament.  Shall  we  then  say 
that  this  touching  story  Avhich  Goethe  pro- 
nounced to  be  "  the  loveliest  thing  in  the 
shape  of  an  epic  or  an  idyl  which  has  come 
down  to  us"  is  not  a  narrative  of  facts,  but 
simply  a  pastoral  story  composed  for  moral 
and  didactic  purposes  ? 

Another  objection  is  drawn  from  the 
prayer  of  Jonah  recorded  in  the  second 
chapter  of  his  prophecy.  This  is  said  to  be 
a  cento  of  passages  taken  chiefly  from  the 
Psalms,  many  of  which  were  composed  dur- 
ing the  exile  (iii.  8  ;  xviii.  4,  5,  6  ;  xvi.  10  ; 
XXX.  3  ;  xxxi.  6,  22  ;  xlii.  7  ;  Ixxxviii.  6,  7  ; 
Ixix.  1,  2,  5  ;  cxvi.  17  ;  cxix.  55  ;  cxx.  1  ; 
cxlii.  3). 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  resemblance 
between  Jonah's  language  and  that  of  the 
Scriptures  referred  to  is  real  and  not  imag- 
inary, yet  he  is  not  a  mere  copyist.     If  he 


were,  it  would  make  against  the  allegorical 
theory,  for  why  could  not  the  genius  who 
conceived  and  executed  such  a  marvellous 
composition,  showing  such  a  creative  imag- 
ination and  such  a  power  of  condensation, 
have  expressed  the  sentiments  proper  to  the 
occasion  in  words  of  his  own  ?  Whereas  on 
the  literal  interpretation  it  is  reasonable  to 
6U])pose  that  Jonah's  mind  being  stored  with 
the  Ivrics  used  in  public  worship,  he  natu- 
rally"^  used  these  consecrated  words  and 
phrases  in  uttering  his  feelings.  When  it  is 
said  th.at  the  Psalms  used  were  "sva-itten  in 
view  of  or  at  the  time  of  the  captivity,  one 
doubtful  hyi^othesis  is  sustained  by  another 
equally  doubtful.  The  only  compositions 
of  certainly  late  date  that  are  said  to  be  bor- 
rowed from  are  cxvi.  17  and  cxx.  1.  The 
former  has, 

I  will  olTer  to  Thee  the  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving. 
And  will  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lokd. 

I  will  pay  my  vows  unto  the  Lord, 
Yea,  in  the  presence  of  all  His  people. 

The  words  of  Jonah  are  (verse  9) 

But  I  will  sacrifice  unto  Thee  with  the  voice  of 
thanksgiving  ; 
I  will  pay  that  which  I  have  vowed. 

But  is  it  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  terms 
of  such  a  commonplace  statement  Avere  bor- 
rowed by  the  prophet  ?  The  same  question 
may  be  asked  with  still  more  point  in  re- 
gard to  the  opening  words  of  the  prayer, 

I  called  by  reason  cf  mine  affliction  unto  the  Lord, 
And  He  answered  me, 

which  are  said  to  have  been  taken  from  the 
second  of  the  Psalms  cited  above,  viz.  : 

In  my  distress  I  cried  unto  the  Lord, 
And  He  answered  me. 

Could  not  such  an  utterance  be  made  inde- 
pendently by  two  writers,  v\^ithout  either 
leaning  upon  the  other  ? 

It  is  further  said  of  the  prayer  that  not 
a  single  note  of  repentance  is  struck  from 
first  to  last.  It  contains  no  lamentation 
for  sin.  It  is  not  such  a  hymn  as  could 
have  been  naturally  composed  under  the 
circumstances,  if  those  circumstances  be  re- 
garded as  literal  facts.  Nor  is  it  such  a 
hymn  as  one  would  think  that  a  man  res- 
cued from  the  stomach  of  an  actual  sea- 
monster  would  compose  as  a  memorial  of 
his  deliverance.  In  reply  it  may  be  said 
that  the  objection  fails  to  consider  the  exact 
circumstances  of  the  case,  and  the  purport 
of  the  composition.  Certainly  the  terms 
and  phrases  employed  are  well  adapted  to 
set  forth  after  the  Hebrew  fashion  the  con- 
ceptions of  a  man  drowned  ioi  the  open  sea. 


1890.]        THE  BOOK  OF  JONAH:    IS  IT  FACT  OR  FICTION? 


261 


It  is  his  rescue  from  this  hopeless  condition 
that  he  celebrates,  and  not  from  the  im- 
prisonment in  the  fish's  belly,  for  the  latter 
was  a  token  of  favor  and  the  means  of  his 
preservation.  What  he  dwells  on  is  that  he 
had  sunk  down  to  the  roots  of  the  moun- 
tains, his  liead  wrapped  in  the  seaweed  and 
the  solid  bars  of  the  earth  around  him  for- 
ever, and  yet  Jehovah,  his  God,  had  de- 
livered him  from  the  desperate  entangle- 
ment. This  absorbs  his  mind.  There  is  no 
confession  of  sin,  but  there  is  no  assertion  of 
righteousness  (as  in  Ps.  xviii.  20-24  and  else- 
where) ;  there  are  no  words  of  repentance, 
but  is  not  this  implied  in  his  calling  upon 
Jehovah,  and  his  turning  again,  though  cut 
oif  and  cast  out,  toward  God's  holy  temple  ? 
And  is  it  anything  marvellous  if  the  con- 
sciousness of  forgiveness  assured  by  his  rescue 
so  filled  his  mind  with  the  sense  of  gratitude 
that  this  alone  was  the  burden  of  his  utter- 
ance unto  the  Lord  ?  Besides,  the  argument 
may  be  turned  against  its  proposers,  and  wo 
may  ask,  if  this  narrative  were  an  apologue 
composed  by  some  sacred  scholar  in  his  re- 
tirement, would  he  not  have  been  careful  to 
insert  a  proper  expression  of  the  prophet's 
sin  .'*  The  omission  of  such  an  utterance, 
therefore,  makes  for  the  historical  character 
of  the  book.  At  the  same  time  it  is  note- 
worthy that  while  Jonah's  sin  is  clearly  set 
forth  no  remarks  are  made  upon  the  sub- 
ject. Even  at  the  close  of  the  proceeding, 
when  the  prophet  displayed  his  miserable  pet- 
ulance so  strikingly,  all  the  reproof  uttered 
is  simply  a  question,  ''  Doest  thou  well  to  be 
angry  ?"  The  design  was  to  use  iiim  and 
his  narrow-minded  bigotry  as  a  foil  in  order 
to  set  forth  the  wondrous  compassion  of  the 
Most  High  more  effectively.  Hence  the 
absence  of  penitential  confessions  in  Jonah's 
prayer  is  no  argument  against  the  real  oc- 
currence of  the  strange  rescue  tliat  called 
forth  his  gratitude  and  praise. 

Again,  it  is  said  that,  considering  the 
size  and  importance  of  Nineveh  and  the 
minute  and  well  developed  system  of  idol- 
atry that  prevailed  there,  it  is  incredible 
that  such  a  change  should  so  suddenly  have 
been  produced  by  the  outcry  of  a  single 
man,  and  no  record  of  it  made  in  the 
monuments  that  remain.  The  'answer  is 
that  extensive  and  thorough  as  is  our  ac- 
quaintance with  the  history  and  literature 
of  ancient  Egypt,  there  has  yet  to  be  found 
any  trace  of  the  ten  plagues  inflicted  through 
Moses  or  of  the  catastrophe  at  the  Red  Sea. 
The  lacuna  in  the  Nile  Valley  explains  the 
lacuna  on  the  Tigris.  Besides,  it  is  not 
said  that  the  Ninevites  were  spiritually  con- 
verted, or  that  they  dethroned  their  idols. 


or  that  they  worshipped  the  Jehovah  of  the 
Hebrews.  All  these  things  may  have  taken 
place,  but  they  are  not  necessarily  involved 
in  the  view  that  the  narrative  is  historical. 
All  that  the  book  says  is  that  the  people 
one  and  all  repented,  turned  from  their  evil 
ways,  especially  "  the  violence  that  was  in 
their  hands,"  and  instituted  a  universal  fast 
accompanied  with  a  fervent  cry  unto  God, 
i.e.,  the  God  whose  announcement  had 
struck  them  with  terror.  It  was  more  an 
ethical  than  a  religious  movement.  Now 
there  is  on  record  the  case  of  an  individual 
which  for  ought  we  know  may  present  ex- 
actly what  occurred  at  Nineveh.  Elijah 
was  sent  to  Ahab  with  a  prediction  of 
dreadful  evil  upon  him  because  he  sold  him- 
self to  work  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord, 
whereupon  the  king  rent  his  clothes  and 
put  sackcloth  upon  his  flesh,  and  fasted, 
and  went  softly  (1  Kings  xxi.  27).  There 
is  not  much  reason  to  consider  this  exercise 
of  Ahab  a  deep-seated  and  spiritual  one 
such  as  is  described  in  Ps.  xxxii.  and  li.,  espe- 
cially when  one  remembers  his  conduct  and 
his  death,  as  described  in  the  next  chapter, 
yet  Jehovah  was  pleased  to  accept  it,  and 
accordingly  he  said  to  Elijah,  "  Seest  thou 
how  Ahab  humbleth  himself  before  me  ?  be- 
cause he  humbleth  himself  before  me,  I  will 
not  bring  the  evil  in  his  days,  but  in  his 
son's  days  will  I  bring  the  evil  upon  his 
house."  What  is  to  hinder  us  from  think- 
ing that  the  humiliation  and  fasting  and 
reformation  of  the  Ninevites  procured  for 
them  just  what  Ahab's  humiliation  pro- 
cured for  him,  i.e.,  not  a  reversal  of  the 
sentence,  but  a  suspension  of  it,  so  that  it 
was  not  inflicted  upon  him,  but  upon  an- 
other generation  ?  This  agrees  with  all  the 
facts  in  the  case.  Nineveh  was  overthrown, 
and  the  predictions  of  Israel's  prophets 
were  literally  accomplished,  but  it  was  more 
than  a  century  after  Jonah's  time.  The 
mission  of  the  disobedient  prophet  was  ef- 
fectual. It  accomplished  its  pur]30se.  It 
spared  more  than  sixscore  thousand  people 
for  several  generations,  and  exhibited  in 
the  most  striking  manner  the  mercy  and 
forbearance  of  the  Most  High. 

As  to  the  language  of  the  book,  it  has 
been  claimed  that  there  are  words  used 
which  distinctly  show  that  it  was  composed 
at  a  late  period  when  the  language  received 
a  Chaldaizing  element.  But  Dr.  Pusey  in 
his  commentary  has  shown  that  all  or  nearly 
all  the  words  specified  are  Hebrew  or  from 
a  Hebrew  root,  and  that  they  are  not  used 
elsewhere  because  there  was  no  occasion  to 
use  them,  just  as  Luke,  for  the  same  rea- 
son, in  recounting  Paul's  voyage  to  Rome, 


262 


MAGAZIN^E  OF  CHRISTIAK  LITERATURE. 


[August, 


employs  a  number  of  words  not  to  be  found 
in  any  other  part  of  the  New  Testament. 
One  peculiar  word  (faani)  rendered  "  de- 
cree," which  is  not  Hebrew  but  Aramaic, 
was  doubtless  the  very  term  used  in  Nin- 
eveh to  designate  the  ordinance  of  the  king 
and  nobles. 

The  notion  that  the  book  is  a  fiction 
seems  to  us  not  consonant  with  the  ideas 
we  are  accustomed  to  cherish  concerning 
divine  revelation.  As  the  late  Dr.  J.  A. 
Alexander  stated  it,  "  The  necessity  of  fic- 
tion to  illustrate  moral  truth  arises  not 
from  the  deficiency  of  real  facts  adapted  to 
the  purpose,  but  from  the  writer's  limited 
acquaintance  with  them,  and  his  conse- 
quent incapacity  to  frame  the  necessary 
combinations  without  calling  in  the  aid  of 
his  imagination.  But  no  such  necessity  can 
exist  in  the  case  of  an  inspired,  much  less 
of  an  omniscient  teacher.  To  resort  to  fic- 
tion, therefore,  when  real  life  affords  in 
such  abundance  the  required  analogies, 
would  be  a  gratuitous  preference,  if  not  of 
the  false  to  the  true,  at  least  of  the  imag- 
inary to  the  real  which  seems  unworthy  of 
our  Lord,  or  which,  to  say  the  least,  we 
have  no  room  to  assume  without  necessity" 
(Com.  on  Mark,  p.  8G).  He  thinks  there- 
fore that  all  our  Saviour's  parables  are 
founded  on  fact,  if  not  entirely  composed 
of  real  incidents.  But  whether  this  be  so 
or  not,  they  are  set  forth  as  simply  illustra- 
tions of  moral  or  religious  truth  derived 
from  the  analogy  of  human  experience. 
They  do  not  pretend  to  be  anything  more 
than  figurative  statements  or  prolonged 
metaphors,  and  can  in  no  case  deceive.* 
All  hearers  or  readers  at  once  penetrate  be- 
neath the  surface,  and  see  what  is  really 
meant.  Take,  for  example,  the  parable  of 
Dives  and  Lazarus.  The  rich  man  is  repre- 
sented as  asking  for  water  to  cool  his  tongue, 
yet  at  that  very  time  his  body,  as  the  para- 
ble says,  was  lying  in  the  grave,  and  hence 
every  one  sees  that  these  words  are  only  a 
representation  of  mental  anguish.  The 
same  is  true  of  all  the  so-called  apologues  in 
the  Old  Testament.  They  bear  their  meta- 
phorical meaning  on  their  face.  And  this 
seems  to  have  been  the  rule,  and  one  in 
marked  contrast  with  the  customs  of  the 
Orientals,  whose  teachings  abounded  in 
fables,  apologues,  and  allegories.  Thus 
the  extremely  fine  story  of  the  way  in  which 
Abraham  came  to  escape  the  idolatries  of 


*  Are  any  words  strong  enough  to  express  the  difference  be- 
tween a  transparent  fiction  like  that  of  the  parable  of  the 
Sower  which  every  hearer  detects  at  once  as  having  a  concealed 
meaning,  and  a  narrative  which  has  so  much  the  appearance 
of  actual  history  that  forages  and  generations  it  neve- enters 
the. mind  of  a  reader  that  it  is  anything  else  ? 


the  primeval  world,  which  is'  referred  to  by 
Josephus  and  Philo,  and  given  at  length  in 
the  Talmud  and  the  Koran,  was  doubtless 
extant  when  our  Canon  was  formed  if  not 
long  before,  yet  it  was  not  inserted  in  the 
sacred  text,  simply  because  it  was  not 
true.  Abraham  might  have  said  this,  but 
there  is  no  evidence  that  he  did  say  it. 
Yet  if  it  had  been  reproduced,  it  would 
have  impressed  the  reader  as  the  narrative 
of  a  fact.  * 

And  just  here  is  the  great  objection  to 
the  view  which  regards  Jonah  as  an  ideal 
composition.  Not  a  hint  of  anything  of 
the  kind  is  anywhere  given  in  the  prophecy. 
From  first  to  last  the  book  runs  on  like  the 
narrative  of  a  series  of  actual  occurrences. 
Indeed,  so  plain  and  palpable  is  this  that 
one  is  tempted  to  think  that  if  it  had  not 
been  for  the  abnormal  entombment  of  the 
j)rophet  in  the  belly  of  the  fish,  no  one 
would  ever  have  dreamed  of  taking  it  as  an 
allegory.  This  seems  to  have  staggered  the 
faith  of  men,  yet  without  reason.  For  to 
one  who  believes  in  God  nothing  in  the 
shape  of  a  miracle  is  incredible.  One  sign 
difliers  from  another  in  its  form  and  accom- 
paniments, but  substantially  all  stand  upon 
the  same  footing,  and  are  alike  manifesta- 
tions of  Him  to  whom  all  things  are  possi- 
ble. "  There  can  be  no  scale  of  the  miracu- 
lous. To  Infinite  Power  it  is  no  easier  to 
pick  up  a  pin  than  to  stop  all  the  planets  in 
their  courses  for  a  time  and  then  send  them 
on  again"  (Eeade).  Nor  is  it  for  us  to  de- 
termine when,  where,  and  how  the  miracu- 
lous shall  be  put  forth.  And,  further,  if  the 
fish's  swallowing  Jonah  is  objectionable  as 
a  fact,  why  is  it  not  equally  so  as  an  ideal 
narrative?  If  it  shocks  common  sense  in 
one  case,  why  not  in  the  other  ? 

Again,  the  Book  of  Jonah,  while  of  course 
it  has,  and  must  have,  a  moral  aim,  bears 
throughout  the  appearance  of  an  historical 
narrative  and  has  been  so  regarded  for  ages. 
It  is  thus  referred  to  in  Tobit  xiv.  4,  8,  15, 
and  by  Josephus,  Ant.  9,  10  :  2.  In  the 
Koran  a  chapter  (the  tenth)  bears  the 
prophet's  name  as  a  title,  and  in  the  thirty- 
seventh  chapter  there  is  a  distinct  recital  of 
his  experiences— that  he  fled,  that  he  was 
cast  overboard  and  swallowed  by  a  fish, 
that  he  was  vomited  out,  and  that  a  gourd 
was  made  to  grow  up  over  him.      There  is 

.yl7^^  %^Z^-^  '!.*^"^  Siven  in  the  Koran  :  When  night  over- 
shadowed him  he  saw  a  star  and  said,  "This  is  m?  Lord  " 
But  when  it  Bet  he  said,  "  I  like  not  those  that  set."  And  when 
he  saw  the  moon  rising  he  said,  "  This  my  Lord  "    But  when 

n  theThfi'''^  ?"T*;r^'  "  ^^•'"'y  "  my  Lord  direft  me  not 
,VJif  K^^*  ^7J  ^  ^^''J".  ^"^  8«  one  of  those  that  err."  And 
when  he  saw  tbe  sun  rising  he  said.  "  This  is  my  Lord  This^ 
greater  than  the  star  or  the  moon."  But  when  the  sun  went 
down  he  said,  "O  my  people,  I  am  clear  of  these  thinirrf 
turu  my  face  to  Him  who  hath  made  the  heaven  aSl  the  Sh  " 


1890.] 


THE  BOOK  OF  JONAH:    IS  IT  FACT  OR  FICTION'? 


263 


also  in  the  twenty-first  chapter  distinct 
mention  of  him  as  the  dweller  in  the  fish 
and  of  his  ]3rayer  in  the  darkness  and  of 
God's  answer.  Now  the  oracles  of  Mo- 
hammed are  not  quoted  as  authority,  but 
they  may  justly  be  appealed  to  as  witnesses 
to  the  prevailing  manners  and  modes  of 
thought  among  the  Orientals,  and  as  evi- 
dence that  an  occurrence  which  to  Western 
tastes  would  be  most  unsuitable  would  ex- 
actly meet  their  needs  and  be  in  their  view 
every  way  appropriate.  The  religious  les- 
son of  the  narrative  is  wholly  neglected  by 
the  Koran,  but  the  miracle  as  an  evidence 
of  God's  power  and  justice  is  duly  empha- 
sized. And  what  is  there  in  the  story  that 
is  justly  objectionable  to  the  people  of  any 
age  or  land  ?  As  far  back  as  the  Song  of 
Moses  (Deut.  xxxii.  21)  we  read 

They  have  moved  me  to  jealousy  with  that  which 

is  not  God  ; 
They  have  provoked  me  to  anger  with  their  vani- 

ties : 
And  I  will  move  them  to  jealousy  with  those  who 

arc  not  a  people  ; 
I  will  provoke  them  to  anger  with  a  foolish  nation. 

These  words  are  quoted  by  the  Apostle  Paul 
(Rom.  X.  19)  to  prove  that  Israel  would 
be  rejected  for  their  sins  and  the  Gentiles 
received  to  favor  instead  of  them  ;  and  they 
had  the  same  meaning  at  an  older  date. 
When  Jonah  was  commissioned  to  go  to 
Nineveh,  he  doubtless  remembered  these 
words  of  the  Most  High,  and  inferred  that 
the  substitution  spoken  of  was  about  to 
take  place,  in  consequence  of  which  repent- 
ant Nineveh  would  become  the  people  of 
God  while  the  children  of  Abraham  would 
be  cast  out.  And  this  was  insupportable. 
In  any  event  the  covenant  people  were  no 
longer  to  be  the  exclusive  recipients  of  di- 
vine revelation.  Eather  than  be  a  party  to 
any  such  proceeding  Jonah  would  renounce 
his  office  and  give  up  his  home  in  Israel. 
God  allows  him  to  carry  out  liis  purpose  so 
far  as  to  embark  for  a  heathen  port,  and 
then  interposes  with  a  fearful  storm  so  per- 
sistent and  increasing  as  to  suggest  super- 
natural agency.  In  the  end  he  is  cast  over- 
board, but  is  miraculously  preserved  in  a 
most  wonderful  way,  whereupon  his  com- 
mission is  renewed  and  he  executes  it  with 
the  result  which  he  anticipated  from  the 
beginning.  Nineveh  repents  and  is  spared. 
The  prophet  repines  and  mourns,  and  is  re- 
buked by  symbol  and  word,  in  the  gourd 
which  sheltered  him  and  in  the  words  of 
Jehovah,  "  Should  not  I  have  pity  on  that 
great  city  Nineveh  ?"  Now  we  may  well 
ask.  If  Jewish  narrowness  and  bigotry  were 
to  be  rebuked  and  God's  boundless  grace  to 


be  set  forth,  how  could  these  things  be 
more  effectually  accomplished  than  by  such 
a  series  of  events  as  are  here  recorded  ? 
The  objections  made  to  the  narrative  as 
halting  and  incomplete  are  of  no  account, 
for  all  that  is  necessary  for  the  instruction 
of  the  reader  is  given.  What  the  special 
sins  of  Nineveh  were,  the  name  of  the  king 
then  on  the  throne,  the  details  of  the 
prophet's  journey,  the  subsequent  fate  of 
Jonah,  are  points  not  at  all  required  to  the 
author's  aim.  That  aim  is  not  simply  to 
add  a  chapter  to  Israel's  history  or  record 
what  otherwise  might  be  lost,  but  to  set 
forth  a  divine  disclosure  made  in  a  series  of 
historical  acts  and  words,  and  bearing  upon 
a  feature  of  God's  character  most  likely  at 
that  period  to  be  misconceived  or  denied. 

But  the  decisive  evidence  in  regard  to 
Jonah  is  given  by  our  Lord  in  words  re- 
corded by  two  of  the  evangelists  (Matt.  xii. 
38-41  ;  xvi.  4  ;  Luke  xi.  29-32).  The 
people,  or  rather  certain  of  the  scribes  and 
the  Pharisees,  came  to  him,  seeking  a  sign 
from  heaven.  They  wanted  some  miracu- 
lous token  of  his  divine  mission,  such  as 
when  Moses  gave  manna  from  the  skies,  or 
when  Joshvia  made  the  sun  and  moon  stand 
still,  or  when  Elijah  brought  down  fire  upon 
the  sacrifice  at  Carmel.  To  this  request 
blended  of  idle  curiosity  and  unbelief  Christ 
refused  compliance,  and  said  that  the  only 
sign  of  this  sort  that  would  be  given  to  the 
evil  generation  was  that  of  the  Prophet 
Jonah.  "  For  as  Jonah  was  a  sign  to  the 
Ninevites,  so  shall  also  the  Son  of  man  be 
to  this  generation"  (Luke).  The  words  re- 
corded by  Matthew  show  how  Jonah  was  a 
sign  to  the  Ninevites,  viz.,  his  marvellous 
experience  when  swallowed  by  the  fish, 
'*'  For  as  Jonah  was  three  days  and  three 
nights  in  the  whale's  belly,  so  shall  the  Son 
of  man  be  three  days  and  three  nights  in 
the  heart  of  the  earth."  {Three  days  and 
three  nights  are  to  be  computed  in  the 
Jewish  manner,  which  applies  that  formula 
to  one  whole  day  with  any  part  however 
small  of  two  others.)  The  sign  to  be  given 
is  that  of  his  own  burial  and  resurrection, 
which  Christ's  connects  in  an  enigmatical 
manner  with  a  well-known  incident  of  Old 
Testament  history.  The  historical  verity 
of  that  incident  is  thus  guaranteed  by  the 
Saviour's  words — words  which  are  not  to  be 
explained  away  by  saying  as  Dr.  Hort  does 
(App.  p.  282),  "  It  is  difficult  to  believe 
that  all  the  words  as  they  stand  have  apos- 
tolic authority,"  or  as  does  Professor  Toy 
("  Quotations,"  p.  28)  that  they  are  due 
to  "  the  oral  tradition  ;"  for  the  textual 
authority  for  them  is  complete.     Our  Lord 


264 


MAGAZINE   OF  CHRISTIAX  LITERATURE. 


[August, 


then  says  that  Jonah's  miraculous  deliver- 
ance from  the  belly  of  the  fish  "vvas  a  sign  to 
the  men  of  Nineveh,  i.e.,  a  miglity  deed 
•which  confirmed  to  them  the  authority  of 
the  ])rophet  and  influenced  tlieir  reception 
of  liis  message,  and  similar  Avas  the  inten- 
tion and  in  many  cases  the  result  of  his  own 
deliverance  from  tlie  tomb.  But  if  the  Old 
Testament  story  is  a  myth  or  an  allegory, 
"what  are  "wo  to  think  of  the  New  Testament 
narrative  thus  put  on  a  par  v/ith  the  former  ? 
Surely  the  same  rule  must  be  applied  to 
both.  But  our  Lord  "went  further.  He 
drcAv  a  parallel  not  only  between  Jonah  and 
Himself,  but  also  between  Jonah's  hearers 
and  His  own,  saying.  "  The  men  of  Nineveh 
shall  stand  up  in  the  judgment  witli  this 
generation,  and  shall  condemn  it  ;  for  they 
repented  at  the  preaching  of  Jonah,  and 
behold  a  greater  than  Jonali  is  hero."  The 
force  of  this  solemn  assertion  lies  in  its  lit- 
eral verity.  If  there  was  no  preaching  of 
Jonah  and  no  repenting  of  the  Nincvites, 
then  it  is  impossible  to  see  any  weight  in 
our  Lord's  comparison. 

It  has  been  said  that  "  the  marks  of  a 
story  are  as  patent  in  the  Book  of  Jonah  as 
in  any  one  of  the  Thousand  and  One 
Nights."  It  is  very  true  that  the  literary 
skill  shown  in  the  narrative  is  surjirising. 
Charles  Rcade,  himself  certainly  no  mean 
judge,  has  said  ("  Bible  Characters,"  p.  76), 
that  "It  is  the  most  beautiful  story  ever 
written  in  so  small  a  compass.  In  writing 
it  is  condensation  that  declares  the  master, 
verbosity  and  garrulity  have  their  day,  but 
only  hot-pressed  narratives  live  forever. 
The  book  is  in  forty-eight  verses  or  one 
thousand  three  hundred  and  twenty-eight 
English  Avords.  That  number  does  not 
carry  the  reader  far  even  in  such  close  mod- 
els as  '  Robinson  Crusoe,'  the  '  Vicar  of 
AVakefield,'  '  Candidc'  '  Rassclas,'  yet  in 
Jonah  it  gives  a  wealth  of  incident,  and  all 
the  dialogue  needed  to  carry  on  the  grand 
and  varied  action.  You  have  also  charac- 
ter, not  stationary,  but  growing  just  as 
Jonah's  grew,  and  a  plot  that  woiild  bear 
volumes  yet  Avorkcd  out  without  haste  or 
crudity  and  with  the  jicrfect  proportion  of 
dialogue  and  narrative."  If  this  be  so,  it 
can  be  explained  in  no  other  way  than  that 
in  which  wo  account  for  the  simple  and  un- 
studied yet  lucid  and  complete  and  masterly 
narrative  contained  in  the  synoptical  Gos- 
pels. The  writers  told  nothing  but  tlie 
truth,  but  a  divine  hand  directed  them 
what  to  say  and  how  to  say  it.  And  so 
with  Jonah,  or  whoever  made  the  record 
that  bears  his  name.  The  so-called  resem- 
blance to  an  Arabian  tale  is  onlv  on  the  sur- 


face. All  those  tales  are  of  the  earth,  and 
earthy,  devoid  of  any  ethical  aiui  and  simply 
intended  to  amuse.  But  this  narrative  has 
a  lofty  moral  purpose  throughout.  Even  if 
one  accepts  tlie  conclusion  of  Yolck  in  the 
Schatf-llerzog  Encvclopsedia  {suh  voce)  that 
the  central  purport  of  the  book  is  given  m 
the  three  positions  that  the  prophet  of  God 
must  do  whatever  the  Lord  commands ; 
that  not  even  death  can  frustrate  his  call- 
ing ;  and  that  lie  must  leave  the  fulfilment 
of  his  message  to  God,  there  is  still  that 
Avhich  Avidely  separates  this  narrative  from 
every  other'of  those  to  which  it  has  been 
compared.  The  interval  is  as  wide  as  that 
between  the  one  living  and  supreme  God 
and  the  imaginary  ge?iii  Avhose  aid  is  secured 
by  magical  formula.  But  the  contrast  be- 
comes far  greater  when  one  considers  the 
real  controlling  purpose  of  tlie  book  and 
what  it  contains,  viz.,  the  rebuke  of  national 
bigotry  and  hard-heartedness,  and  the  vindi- 
cation of  Jehovah's  tender  compassion  tow- 
ard His  creatures  even  outside  the  bounds 
of  the  Abrahamic  covenant. 

This  fact  dispels  at  once  and  forever  the 
notion  that  the  book  is  a  poetic  myth  based 
upon  tradition,  or  a  mere  expansion  of  some 
ancient  incident  which  may  or  may  not 
have  been  historical.  There  Avas  nothing 
in  the  character  or  the  habits  or  the  tastes 
of  the  HebrcAvs  at  any  time  during  the  eight 
centuries  before  Christ  to  suggest  or  to  in- 
vite any  such  composition.  Everything 
pointed  the  other  way.  The  habitual 
thought  of  the  people  Avas  that  they  were 
the  favored  and  accepted  people  of  God, 
having  the  true  Avorship  and  the  certain 
hope  of  continuance,  Avhile  all  other  nations 
Avere  idolatrous,  depraved,  and  sure  in  the 
end  to  bo  the  victims  of  the  divine  Avrath. 
The  intensity  and  inveteracy  of  this  feeling 
may  bo  gathered  from  the  evidences  of  its 
survival  to  the  time  of  Christ  and  its  pass- 
ing over  for  a  time  at  least  into  the  Chris- 
tian Church.  Dr.  Wright  has  brought  this 
forth  Avith  his  accustomed  lucidity:  "The 
efforts  made  by  our  Lord  in  His  lifetime  to 
raise  the  degraded  classes  of  the  Jcavs  were 
not  looked  upon  Avith  faA'or  by  the  Pharisees 
and  scribes  (Luke  xa-.  1,  2).  The  A'ery  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus,  Avho  were  directed  by  the 
Master  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  'make 
disciples  of  all  nations,  showed  a  deep-seated 
and  decided  reluctance  to  belicA-e  that  God 
Avas  no  respecter  of  persons ;  but  in  every 
nation  he  that  feareth  Ilim  and  Avorketh 
righteousness,  is  acceptable  to  Him  (Acts 
X.  34).  The  early  Christians  were  amazed 
Avhen  the  Holy  Spirit  was  bestoAved  upon 
the  Gentiles."     Dr.  Wright  justly  remarks 


1890.] 


THE  BOOK  OF  JONAH:    IS  IT  FACT   OF.   FICTIONS 


2G5 


that  "  There  is  little  reason  to  be  surprised 
at  the  jDicture  of  Jonah  sitting  over  against 
Nineveh,  angry  and  sullen  because  God  had 
granted  rejoentance  and  life  from  the  dead 
to  that  city  after  it  had  been  doomed  to  de- 
struction, when  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  in  the 
full  enjoyment  of  a  Pentecostal  effusion  of 
grace,  found  it  so  hard  to  believe  in  the 
loving-kindness  of  God/'  And,  in  fact,  it 
took  a  long  course  of  years  and  many  efforts 
of  the  great  Apostle  to  emancipate  the  Jew- 
ish believers  from  their  prejudices.  Their 
great  desire  was  to  bring  Gentile  Christians 
under  the  yoke  of  the  old  law.  They  in- 
sisted that  these  disciples  should  become 
Jews,  and  like  the  servants  of  Abraham 
should  receive  on  their  persons  the  sign  of 
circumcision.  This  led  to  the  first  great 
controversy  of  the  new  dispensation,  and  to 
settle  it  the  council  was  called  which  met  at 
Jerusalem,  and  after  a  long  discussion  came 
to  a  conclusion  in  favor  of  liberty  (Acts 
XV.).  But  even  this  did  not  settle  the  ques- 
tion in  practice  as  it  did  in  theory,  for  the 
struggle  was  renewed  again  and  again. 
Once  even  Peter  and  Barnabas  were  con- 
strained by  the  adverse  feeling  to  dissemble 
the  broad  and  liberal  views  they  had  before 
held  and  expressed  on  this  question  (Gal.  ii. 
11-14).  'Not  indeed  was  it  finally  settled 
and  laid  to  rest  until  the  period  when  the 
temple  was  destroyed,  the  city  overthrown, 
and  the  Gentile  clement  in  the  Church 
shown  to  be  a  decided  majority.  And  it  is 
fairly  argued  by  Dr.  Wright  that  the  atti- 
tude of  the  Church  on  this  question  under 
apostolic  leading  was  one  great  reason  why 
the  Jews  so  largely  refused  to  recognize  the 
claims  of  Christianity.  They  could  not 
bear  to  admit  that  the  Gentiles  ought  to  be 
admitted  to  an  equal  position  with  them- 
selves. The  two  stumbling-blocks  in  their 
way  were  the  doctrine  of  Christ  crucified 
and  the  equality  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
latter  was  as  great  as  the  former.  When 
Paul  at  Jerusalem  related  in  Hebrew  the 
story  of  his  conversion  and  the  vision  he 
had  seen  of  the  glory  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  he 
was  listened  to  patiently,  far  more  so  than 
was  the  proto-martyr  Stephen  when  he  ad- 
dressed the  council,  but  when  the  Apostle 
proceeded  to  state  that  Christ  had  sent  him 
to  the  Gentiles,  the  Jews  could  abide  his 
speech  no  longer,  but  lifting  up  their  voices 
with  one  accord,  they  cried  out,  "  Away 
with  such  a  fellow  from  the  earth,  for  it  is 
not  fit  that  he  should  live"  (Acts  xxii.  22). 
Thus  did  the  Jews,  the  prophets  of  human- 
ity, intended  by  Divine  Providence  to  be 
the  teachers  of  religion  to  the  world,  act 
when  the  very  mission  they  had  been  se- 


lected and  appointed  to  discharge  met  with 
its  grandest  success.  Such  now  being  the 
prevailing  habit  of  mind  toward  the  heathen 
world,  how  could  there  have  arisen  among 
them  of  their  own  accord  any  conceptions 
of  a  message  to  the  metropolis  of  the  na- 
tions, designed  to  lead  this  great  capital  to 
repentance  and  thus  avert  the  deserved 
judgment  that  impended  ?  What  welcome 
could  such  a  story  receive  ?  What  induce- 
ment Avas  there  for  any  one  to  devise  or  cir- 
culate it  ? 

This  is  still  further  confirmed  by  a  refer- 
once  to  the  prevailing  tenor  of  prophecy  in 
regard  to  Assyria  and  its  capital  Nineveh. 
In  this  point  of  view  the  material  miracle  in 
Jonah's  preservation  in  the  belly  of  the  fish 
is  far  outstripped  by  the  moral  miracle 
shown  in  tlie  mere  fact  of  the  prophet's  mis- 
sion to  Nineveh.  That  stands  alone  in  the 
whole  history  of  the  covenant  people. 
Nothing  like  it  occurred  from  the  days  of 
Samuel  to  those  of  Malachi.  The  great 
empire  whose  seat  was  on  the  Tigris  is  often 
mentioned  in  Scripture,  but  always  in  its 
relation  to  the  covenant  people,  either  as 
an  oppressing  foe  which  is  one  day  to  be  de- 
stroyed, as  in  the  vivid  j)ictures  of  Nahum 
setting  forth  the  assault,  the  siege,  the  cap- 
ture, the  overthrow,  the  final  and  remedi- 
less ruin,  or  in  Zephaniah's  mention  of  the 
day  of  Jehovah's  anger,  the  dies  irm,  when 
He  will  make  Nineveh  a  barren  waste  where 
wild  animals  roam  and  the  pelican  and  the 
porcupine  lodge  amid  the  fallen  columns,  or 
as  an  alien  who  is  one  day  to  be  converted 
into  a  friend,  as  in  Isaiah's  memorable  ut- 
terance (xix.  24,  25),  "  In  that  day  shall 
Israel  be  the  third  with  Egypt  and  with 
Assyria,  a  blessing  in  the  midst  of  the  earth 
for  that  the  Lord  of  hosts  hath  blessed 
them,  saying.  Blessed  be  Egypt  My  people, 
and  Assyria  the  work  of  My  hands,  and 
Israel  Mine  inheritance."  In  marked  con- 
trast to  these  and  all  similar  utterances  is 
the  Book  of  Jonah,  which  makes  no  refei'- 
ence  whatever  to  any  antagonism  between 
Israel  and  Assyria,  and  does  not  point  at  all 
to  the  distant  fviture,  but  deals  only  with 
the  present.  The  prophet  is  summoned  to 
bear  a  divine  message  to  Nineveh,  not  be- 
cause of  past  injuries  to  Israel  or  because 
such  are  apprehended  in  the  future,  but 
simply  because  of  its  wickedness  which  is 
such  as  to  attract  the  attention  of  the  Most 
High  ;  and  Jonah  is  bidden  to  announce  its 
overthrow  within  a  limited  period.  The 
only  reason  for  such  a  warning  beforehand 
was  that  an  opportunity  of  repentance 
might  be  afforded.  This  Jonah  under- 
stood at  once  and  hence  his  refusal  to  act. 


/ 


2C6 


MAGAZIXE   OF  CHRISTIAN  LITERATURE. 


[August 


It  was   unprecedented    tlmt    tlie    heathen 
should  be  dealt  witli  in  tliis  way,  and  he 
was   not   disposed   to   be   an  agent  in  the 
work.     Tliis  luxs  usually  been  regarded  as  a 
personal  defect,  due  to  some  unusual  nar- 
rowness of  disjwsition.     But  this  niav  well 
be  doubted.     Probably  any  other  prophet 
would  luive  done  the  same.     To  admit  indi- 
vidual Ninevitcs  or  even  the  whole  city  to 
the  privileges  of  Judaism  upon  condition  of 
their  adopting  circumcision  and  the  cere- 
monial law  would  have  been  notliing  strange, 
but  to  show  mercy  to  the  heathen  as  heathen, 
and  simply  upon  the  condition  of  repent-* 
ance  was  a  new  departure.     The  case  of  the 
widow  of   Zarephath  (1  Kings  xvii.  10)  is 
not  analogous,  for  Elijah  went  to  her  be- 
cause  his   life   was   not   safe   anywhere   in 
Israel,  and   since   the    Sidonian  widow  re- 
ceived him  and  sheltered  him  he  gained  for 
her  a  great  blessing.     Still  less  is  there  any 
similarity  in  the  case  of  Xaaman.     iS'ot  only 
did  he  apply  himself  in  person  for  what  he 
needed,  but  came  with  money  enough  for  a 
king's  ransom  to  pay  for  liis  cure  if  pay 
were  wanted.     The  circumstances   at  Nin- 
eveh are  wholly  different.     No  application  is 
made,  nothing  in  the  condition  of  Jonah  or 
the  people   to  whom  lie   belonged   invited 
any  such  mission  as  he  effected.     The  whole 
movement  is  original,  spontaneous,  and  free 
from  any  ulterior  thought. 

A  weighty  argument  against  the  allegori- 
cal interpretation  of  the  book  has  been  ad- 
duced by  Dr.  0.  M.  Mead  in  his  recent  vol- 
ume on  ''  Supernatural  Eevolation,''  which 
contains  in  an  Appendix  a  short  essay  on 
the  subject.  The  substance  of  his  forcible 
reasoning  is  here  reproduced.  One  point  is 
that  if  the  book  be  an  allegory  the  author 
must  have  intended  it  to  be  so  understood, 
but  as  it  was  not  so  regarded  by  those  for 
whose  benefit  it  was  written,  he  must  bo 
considered  as  having  made  a  bad  failure. 
This  point  becomes  still  more  serious  wheii 
it  is  claimed  to  be  an  inspired  ideal,  for  then 
the  failure  goes  back  of  the  human  author 
to  the  Divine  Spirit  under  whose  influence 
he  wrote. 

Another  point  is  that  the  very  considera- 
tions which  are  urged  to  prove  the  book  to 
be  unhistoncal  equally  bear  against  the  as- 
sumption of  its  didactic  character.  We  are 
assured  tliat  its  chief  events,  the  strange 
conduct  of  Jonah  in  his  flight  from  the 
presence  of  God,  the  story  of  his  miraculous 
preservation  through  the  fish,  the  improb- 
ability of  so  long  and  toilsome  a  journey  as 
he  IS  represented  as  making,  the  lack  of  de- 
tails in  the  account  of  Nineveh  and  its 
king,  the  thorough  and  universal  repent- 


ance, are  intrinsically  improbable,  and  tha 
therefore  the  story  is  not  historical  and  wa! 
not   intended   to   be   understood    as    such. 
Thus   Kueneu  says,    "■  The   whole  of  this 
writing — which  interpreted   historically   sc 
justly  gives  offence — breathes   a   spirit   oi 
benevolence  and  universal  humanity  which 
is  very  attractive"  ("Religion  of  Israel/' 
II.,  244).     What  else  can  this  mean  than 
that  if  God  had  really  brought  about  by  His 
providence  such  occurrences  as  are  narrated 
in  this  book,  it  would  have  been  justly  offen- 
sive ;  but  if  the  occurrences  are  only  imag- 
ined to  have  taken  place,   they  convey  a 
most  attractive  lesson  'i     Can  anything  be 
more  absurd  ?     The  theory  of  Dr.  Wright, 
the  best  sustained  of  all  that  have  been  de- 
vised to  escape  the  natural  and  rational  in- 
terpretation of  the  narrative,  maintains,  as 
we  have  seen,  that  it  was  composed  in  order 
to  justify  God  for  not  having  fulfilled  the 
prophecies  against  the  heathen  which  are  so 
conspicuous   in   the   writings   of    the    Old 
Testament  seers.     Now  admitting  this   to 
be  the  case,  although  no  evidence  can  be 
adduced  for  it,  the  question  arises  how  this 
end  was  to  be  gained  ?    The  answer  is  that 
the  narrow  conceptions   concerning   God's 
dealings  with  the  heathen  and  His  purposes 
to^yard  them,  which  were  cherished  by  the 
writer's  contemporaries,  would  be  corrected 
by  the  story  of  the  Prophet  Jonah's  preach- 
ing to  the  Ninevites.     This  is  quite  satis- 
factory, if  the  narrative  was  true  and  related 
actual  occurrences,  but  not  at  all  if  it  was 
fictitious.     For   in   that   case   the   narrow- 
minded  contemporaries  might  justly  reply. 
How  can  fiction  give  evidence  in  favor  of 
triith.?     And   especially   how   can   a  story 
which  contains  extravagant  and  incredible 
statements  furnish  a  proper  basis  for  rightly 
conceiving  the  character  of  God  ?    If  the 
story  IS  true  and  what  is  related  did  really 
occur,  we  do  have  a  most  winning  and  con- 
vincing Statement  of  the  gracious  nature  of 
our  covenant  God  ;  but  since  it  is  merely  a 
work  of  the  imagination,  it  leaves  the  case 
just  where  it  was  before.     The  terrible  pre- 
dictions as  to  the  utter  ruin  of  the  great 
world-powers  still  stand,  and  we  await  their 
accomplishment  with  some  disappointment 
that  It  is  so  long  delayed  ;  and  to  meet  the 
case  you  put  us  off  with  an  allegory,  you  re- 
late a  narrative  of  inherently  improbable, 
nay  impossible  events.     We  decline  to  ac- 
cept your  ingenious  fiction  as  an  offset  to 
certain  and  acknowledged  facts.     Thus  it  is 
seen  that  the  theory  Sf  a  didactic  purpose 
m  the  book  and  the  theory  that  it  i  a  pure 
and  acknowleclged  fiction,  are  mutua  l/Se! 
sti-uctive.     Fiction  cannot  do  the  work  of 


1890.] 


THE  DIFFICULTIES  IN  SCRIPTURE. 


267 


truth.  Fictitious  narratives  may  and  do 
often  powerfully  excite  the  feelings,  but 
they  cannot  turn  doubt  into  conviction  or 
unbelief  into  belief.  That  is  quite  beyond 
their  province.  The  illustrious  men  whose 
names  have  come  down  to  us  as  models  of 
heroism,  self-sacrifice,  charity,  or  devotion 
make  a  deep  impression  so  long  as  the  rec- 
ord made  of  them  is  deemed  trustworthy, 
but  let  it  bo  resolved  into  a  myth  or  an 
allegory,  and  the  charm  is  at  an  end. 
It  is  time  to  sum  up. 

1.  The  book  has  every  appearance  of 
being  a  record  of  facts,  not  a  hint  to  the 
contrary  being  anywhere  dropped. 

2.  It  was  evidently  so  regarded  by  the 
compilers  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon. 

3.  The  same  view  prevailed,  so  far  as  we 
have  any  evidence  on  the  subject,  among  the 
Jews  in  the  time  of  Christ. 

4.  The  modern  opponents  of  this  view 
differ  widely  as  to  the  date  of  the  book's 
composition,  some  putting  it  in  the  eighth 
century  B.C.,  others  in  the  second,  the  times 
of  the  Maccabees,  and  the  rest  at  various 
intermediate  periods.* 

5.  They  differ  also  as  to  its  character. 
Some  make  it  an  allegory,  others  a  legend 
or  tale,  others  a  myth,  intermingled  with 
Grecian  or  with  Babylonian  elements,  others 
a  moral  fable  or  parable,  and  others  a  pro- 
phetic didactic  fiction. 

6.  The  objections  they  make  to  its  reality, 
whether  founded  upon  its  place  in  the  Minor 
Prophets,  its  style  and  language,  its  lack  of 
details,  the  improbability  of  the  events  it 
records,  or  the  failure  of  the  historical  books 
to  mention  them,  are  all  without  founda- 
tion. 

7.  If  the  book  was  intended  as  an  alle- 
gory, it  failed  of  its  purpose,  as  it  was  not 
so  regarded  by  the  Jews. 

8.  If  it  was  a  didactic  fiction  it  could  not 
answer  the  end  proposed,  because  as  a  fic- 
tion it  could  show  only  what  God  might  do, 
not  what  He  would  do  or  was  actually  doing 
at  the  time. 

9.  If  it  was  not  amiss  to  feign  that  God 
acted  as  the  book  represents  Him,  where  is 
the  harm  in  considering  that  He  really  did 
so  act? 

10.  If  the  narrative  viewed  as  fiction  is 
honoring  to  God  and  helpful  to  man,  surely 
it  is  immeasurably  more  so  if  it  be  consid- 
ered strictly  historical. 

11.  The  testimony  of  our  Saviour  is  con- 
clusive. He  referred  to  Jonah  and  Nineveh 
just  as  He  did  to  Tyre  and  Sidon,  to  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah,  or  to  Noah  and  the  deluge, 

*  For  details  on  this  point  and  the  next,  see  Lange's  "  Com- 
mentary, Minor  Prophets,  Jonah,"  pp,  3, 11. 


or  even  more  emphatically  ;  and  by  conse- 
quence all  are  alike  historical. 

12.  If  the  book  is  a  fiction  (whether  in- 
spired or  uninspired  makes  no  difference), 
the  solemn  warning  of  the  Lord  Jesus  to 
His  contemporaries  is  utterly  pointless. 

I  conclude  with  two  sentences  from  Dr. 
Donald  Fraser's  "  Synoptical  Lectures  on 
the  Books  of  Scripture"  (L,  340).  "The 
stones  of  Nineveh  have  risen  already  within 
our  own  lifetime  to  cry  out  against  the  men 
of  this  generation  who  were  incredulous  of 
Bible  history.  But  there  is  to  be  a  greater 
resurrection  on  those  famous  Eastern  plains. 
The  men  of  Nineveh  shall  stand  up  in  the 
judgment  with  this  generation,  and  shall 
condemn  it  ;  because  they  repented  at  the 
preaching  of  Jonah  ;  and  behold,  a  greater 
than  Jonah  is  here." 


For  The  Magazine  op  Christian  Literature. 

THE  DIFFICULTIES  IN  SCRIPTURE. 

BY  BEV.  HOVTARD  CROSBY,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  PAS- 
TOR OF  THE  FOURTH  AVENUE  PRESBY- 
TERIAN   CHURCH,    NEW    YORK    CITY. 

The  Bible  is  a  composite  of  apparently 
sixty-six  books  (which  may  be  reduced  to 
fifty-seven)  written  by  at  least  forty  differ- 
ent authors  during  a  period  of  fifteen  hun- 
dred years.  That  a  work  thus  constituted 
should  have  a  substantial  unity  is  a  wonder 
unparalleled  in  the  history  of  literature. 
This  fact,  if  carefully  considered,  would 
alone  prove  that  a  divine  influence  has 
marked  its  production.  From  the  tree  of 
life  in  the  beginning  of  Genesis  to  the  tree 
of  life  in  the  end  of  Revelation  the  viewof 
God  and  man  is  the  same,  and  the  holy 
philosophy  taught  is  one.  Man  is  through- 
out a  sinner.  God  is  the  holy  and  right- 
eous Judge  and  the  merciful  Saviour. 
Bloody  sacrifice  is  the  medium  through 
which  man  comes  to  God,  by  which  He 
maintains  His  justice  and  yet  justifies  the 
sinner.  The  Infinite  Judge  is  thus  the 
pitying  Father  to  every  one  who  will  have 
it  so.  There  is  no  conflict  of  doctrine  any- 
where in  the  Bible. 

1.  The  oppositions  that  men  have  alleged 
between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New 
have  been  the  results  of  superficial  thought. 
Changes  have  been  rung  on  the  antagonism 
of  Law  and  Gospel,  as  if  the  Old  Testament 
prescribed  good  works  as  the  efficient  means 
of  salvation,  while  the  New  Testament  pre- 
scribed faith,  when  the  truth  is  that  the 
Old  Testament  is  full  of  faith  and  the  Gos- 
pel, and  exhibits  God's  holy  law  as  a  rule  of 


268 


MAGAZINE  OF  CHEISTIAX  LITERATURE. 


[Augtist, 


life  for  tlioso  who  accept  Balvatiou  by  faith 
in  the  sacrilice  appoiutecl  of  God.  From 
Abel  to  Noali  ami  from  Xoali  to  Abraham 
tlie  bloody  sacrilice  is  the  symbol  of  a  sub- 
stitute bearing  man's  sin,  and  faith,  not 
■work,  is  the  etticient  factor  in  the  worship. 
"  By  faith  Abel  offered  up."  '*'  Abraham 
hdiercd  God,  and  it  was  accounted  to  him  for 
righteousness."  It  is  God's  mercy,  and  not 
man's  obedience  to  law,  that  saves  man,  and 
this  is  tlio  doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament  as 
much  as  of  the  New.  The  typical  cere- 
monies of  the  Old  Church  were  no  means  of 
salvation,  but  types  of  tlie  coming  One  in 
whom  faith  centred.  The  fact  that  the 
Jews  perverted  these  types  and  made  them 
saving  ordinances  no  more  alters  the  truth 
of  their  oliaracter  than  the  same  perversion 
of  ordinances  in  tJie  present  Church  of 
Christ.  The  godly  soul  finds  the  self-same 
teaching  in  Exodus  as  in  Matthew^  in  the 
Tsalms    3  in  John. 

2.  X.  .ct  to  this  difficulty  about  the  two 
Testaments  we  may  place  the  doctrinal  diffi- 
culties that  men  find  in  the  teaching  con- 
cerning the  fall  of  man,  the  incarnation  of 
the  Word,  tlie  substituted  sacrifice,  the  sal- 
vation by  faith,  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  These  doctrines  are  said  to  be  con- 
trary to  the  reasonable  propositions  that 
God  would  not  let  man  sin  ;  that  God,  who 
is  Spirit,  could  not  be  man  ;  that  one  suffer- 
ing for  another  is  unjust  and  does  not  meet 
the  end  of  punishment ;  that  works  have  far 
more  merit  than  faith,  and  that  to  confound 
the  Divine  Spirit  with  man's  spirit  is  ab- 
surd. These  difficulties  regarding  the  car- 
dinal doctrines  of  Scripture  are  to  be  an- 
swered by  the  truths  that  man  is  sinful, 
howrever  it  came  about,  and  that  as  a  sinner 
it  is  for  him  to  look  not  to  himself,  but  to 
God  for  salvation  and  restoration  to  holi- 
ness, and  that  tlie  Scripture  professes  to  be 
God's  way  of  saving  sinful  man.  It  will  be 
seen  that  a  free  will  in  man  implied  the 
power  to  sin  ;  that,  if  man  was  made  in  the 
image  of  God,  there  is  nothing  incredible  in 
the  Son  of  God  becoming  man ;  that  in 
Him  thus  becoming  man  and  suffering, 
man's  sin  was  punished  in  man,  and  that 
the  saved  are  tliose  who,  by  the  indwelling 
of  the  Divine  Spirit,  are  made  one  Avith  the 
Son  of  God  who  became  man.  The  salva- 
tion is  thus  reasonable  and  in  full  accord- 
ance with  the  holiness  and  justice  of  God. 
But  these  difticulties  of  doctrine,  though  so 
readily  explained,  will  never  be  received  by 
the  evil  heart  of  man  until  he  bow  humbly 
before  God  as  speaking  in  His  Holy  "Word. 

3,  After  these  difficulties  come  those  of  a 
lower  nature.     First,  there  is  the  difficulty 


about  miracles.  Old  and  New  Testaments 
both  narrate  many  miracles,  and  if  these 
are  falsehoods  the  revelation  is  a  cheat. 
Those  who  would  eliminate  the  miracles  de- 
stroy the  whole  authority  of  the  Bible,  for 
they  are  interwoven  with  the  whole  texture 
of  Scripture.  You  cannot  take  out  these 
threads  without  ruining  the  whole  cloth. 
But  miracles,  instead  of  being  a  difficulty, 
ought  to  be  a  witness  to  the  truth  of  Scrip- 
ture. A  revelation  of  God  without  a  mir- 
acle could  have  no  Aveight  in  the  human 
mind,  for  the  mere  learning  about  God 
from'tho  Avorks  of  nature  is  no  revelation  in 
the  sense  Ave  use  the  word.  A  revelation 
demands  a  miracle.  We  can  conceive  of 
none  Avithout.  A  revelation  is  extraor- 
dinary, something  outside  of  the  ordinary 
course  of  nature.  It  must  have  a  specific 
and  direct  action  on  the  mind,  that  it  may 
not  be  mistaken  for  anything  else.  And 
hence  it  must  have  the  credentials  of  ex- 
traordinary events  impossible  to  man,  and 
yet  wrought  by  man  as  evidence  that  God 
chooses  him  as  Ilis  mouthpiece.  So  Moses, 
the  prophets,  Christ  and  the  apostles,  all 
Avho  furnish  us  with  the  Book  of  God, 
Avrought  miracles  in  confirmation  of  their 
divine  calling  and  message.  Hence  the 
words  of  Peter,  "  Jesus  Christ  ajDproved  of 
God  among  3^ou  by  miracles  and  wonders 
and >  signs."  This  is  the  function  of  mir- 
acles), and  we  Avould  not  bo  justified  in  ac- 
cepting anything  as  God's  Word  unless  it 
Avere  ]3roved  by  miracle.  Miracle  confirmed 
the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  and  only 
miracle  could  set  it  aside  and  confirm  the 
NcAv  in  its  place.  Otherwise  we  should  yet 
have  tlie  old  ritual  as  our  form  of  Avorship. 
_  That  miracles  are  impossible  is  the  asser- 
tion only  of  the  atheistic  mind.  If  God 
cannot  do  Avorks  impossible  to  man,  then 
there  is  no_  God.  The  proof  of  miracles  is 
that  of  ordinary  human  testimony. 

4.  After  the  difficulty  regarding  miracles 
and  the  supernatural,  which  Ave  assert  to 
have  no  basis  in  reason,  we  may  put  the 
matter  of  discrepancies  in  the  Scriptures. 
Of  course  it  would  be  impossible  in  a  brief 
paper  to  catalogue  the  alleged  discrepancies 
and  meet  them  all.  There  are  useful  books 
in  which  this  has  been  done  more  or  less 
completely,  as,  for  example,  Haley's  "Ex- 
amination of  the  Alleged  Discrepancies  of 
the  Bible,"  published  at  Andover  in  1881. 
Many  of  our  best  commentaries  explain  sat- 
isfactorily the  points  at  issue.  All  we  can 
do  in  this  article  is  to  call  attention  to  a 
few  general  facts  regarding  these  alleged  dis- 
crepancies. In  the  first  place,  thousands 
of  mtelligent  and  learned  Christians  have 


(jaulord  : 
PAWPHin  BIMOre 

;^^;    Syrocuse,  N.   Y. 
■    Stockton,  Calif. 


DATE  DUE 

• 

ws^tsSa*^?^^ 

iwr 

v-.jiti.:r 

mmum^ 

-*^^**^" 

!','?]ff^f^ia 

1^ 

....'.,.  1  f   -: 

' 

! 

CAVLORD 

PBINTEDINO.S.A 

Pnnceton  Theological  Sem.nary-Speer  Library^ 


1    1012  00054  9107 


I.  **' 


"*. 


<}, 


>. 


iiJwmitiL..  '    ■   ■tA^m 


